Rebecca Walker Blog

There is a lot of discussion about "feminist in-fighting" of late, spurred by the election. Jessica Valenti of Feministing.com is doing a piece on the subject for The Nation. Here is my response to her query:

1. The fact is there have always been many "feminisms," but one dominant, more visible Feminism, which is essentially comprised of the needs, views, and philosophies of straight white women with a certain degree of privilege. Now we can add "and of a certain age" to that list. Women of different backgrounds have been speaking to this issue of exclusivity for decades, and their critiques have been voluminous. The lack of resolution of these critiques is currently manifesting in an exacerbated form, and labeled "infighting." There are no new issues on the table. For example, my mother, Alice Walker, did not create the term "womanist" in the late seventies because she was feeling creative. I did not offer the concept of Third Wave in the nineties because I wanted to inject a catchy phrase into the Feminist discourse. And, many "mainstream" women did not reject the Feminist label in the sixties to present because they don't know what Feminism really is.

The complaints brought against Feminism include racism, classism, ageism, out of touchism, and a certain tendency toward First World arrogance. There has been an enduring wariness in communities of color specifically, about Feminism's mantra of independence rather than interdependence with male family members and the world at large. This would include Feminism's ambivalence about motherhood, marriage, and domestic life in general. This would include Feminism's divisive and ultimately unhelpful commentary that women need men like fish need bicycles (women need their grandfathers, fathers, sons, brothers, etc for a host of reasons too lengthy and obvious to list here). This would include Feminism's dismissal of religion itself based on its patriarchal leadership. This would include Feminism's characterization of young women who don't fall in line with the Feminist status quo as naive and ungrateful. This would include Feminism's short-sidedness that will ultimately undo the work of their anointed protegees.

Simply put, if Feminism was Wal-Mart, and had as many decades-old unresolved grievances against it, it would have long ago been bankrupt.

2. What we see in this election is the zenith of the decades-old struggle between women of different sensibilities seeking empowerment, enfranchisement, and their rightful share of the resources available. The issue at hand has to do with Feminism's (not feminism's) inability to respond adequately to the claims brought against it. If, for instance, the leadership had taken the aforementioned critiques, including those in my 1995 book To Be Real, seriously, many younger women might not feel so alienated from a movement that achieved so much for them. Women of color at large might not still be skeptical of what they perceive to be Feminism's true agenda--to empower the few and not the many. Men, many of whom would be allies to feminism's cause, would not feel attacked, rejected and alienated from a movement that held great potential benefit for them as well.

The rise of Women for Obama then, to some extent has to do with Feminism's creation of a vacuum. This is why, for instance, a Wal-Mart would "go green" at the insistence of its customers. If Wal-Mart did not respond to the messages of its base, its base would go elsewhere. To a consumer environment that better suits their sensibilities an aspirations, perhaps. The same could be said about Feminism.

3. Overall, the response of Second Wave Feminist leadership has been a stubborn insistence that it has already accommodated the aforementioned views and critiques, and that if people would just understand the "real" history, this would all be cleared up. There does not seem to be an understanding that this very response is problematic, insulting and trivializing to those who have brought forward these concerns. It is not that this diverse community of challengers is ignorant, it is that they have surmised the landscape to find many of their concerns and reservations confirmed. It is no secret that, just as middle class blacks have benefited the most from the civil rights movement and the rest are either impoverished or in jail, so have a certain group of women been the primary beneficiaries of Feminism.

To continue the analogy, if Wal-Mart claimed it had made the switch to green, but the products on its shelves were, in fact, not reflective of that claim, Wal-Mart would lose the faith of its customers and again, over time, be forced into bankruptcy.

4. Based on the above, I am not entirely certain that the calls decrying Feminism's death are incorrect or even undesirable. Perhaps a Feminism that has not responded to the needs of its constituents needs to die. Perhaps Obama is unintentionally killing Feminism and facilitating the rise of "feminisms." We shall see. He has clearly addressed the issue of ageism. Young people are not marginalized in his campaign or team of advisors. In fact, young people of all backgrounds have come out in support of his message by the hundreds of thousands. This generation has yet to do the same for Feminism.

Okay, this really is the last one today. I had to include for all you pregnant moms out there. I wrote about my skepticism of the medicalization of my pregnancy in Baby Love. This is a good contribution to the discussion.

Great piece and conversation on a controversial point that shouldn't be so controversial. When was the last time George Bush was taken to the mat over David Duke or any other hugely problematic white leader?

Hey all—sitting at LAX waiting to go home when this article came up on the transom. I like the points Lynn Harris makes: the divisive aspect of characterizing Obama-ites as young and future thinking and Clintonians as the old, the stodgy, the uncool. In a campaign about uniting, there seems to be a lot of dividing afoot.

For mixed families, cultural, racial and political, this could be the most challenging election ever. At the moment, it's hard to know what the fall-out from this will be. Someone is going to lose. How do you think that will play out in the country, and at home?

Hey from beautiful San Miguel de Allende. Did a talk at the literary festival here and had a wonderful time with some super smart expats, all eager to engage on issues of writing memoir and surviving it. Any of you out in SMA, the memoir writing workshop is Monday from 3-6. Come on down!

Check out this piece by Kavita Nandini Ramdas, Leveraging the Power of Race and Gender. We met years ago when we were both honored with the Women Who Could Be President Award from the League of Women Voters. Hers is a smart, interesting, and more international view of the election.

I've been watching with interest the turn HRC's campaign is taking, and how the media reacts. Seems no matter which way she turns, she's motherized. She's either team leader soccer mom, cold and stoic mom,vulnerable and loving mom, or now, this new incarnation, scolding mom.

Much has been written on the paternalism of the President, the way the citizenry identifies the president as the ultimate father/protector. I'd like to see HRC embrace being the mother of the nation rather than evade or tip-toe around the gender issue. She should take a few lessons from Queen Elizabeth, or even just Cate Blanchett.

Do you think the word "feel" is inappropriate here? It uses Clinton's gender against her by associating her responses with irrational emotion (always seen as weaker) than certainty, logical thinking, and a determination to win. My biggest concern about Obama? He married Michelle, but forgot to take Women's Studies 101 at Harvard.

To be clear: I'm still on the fence, but as I gather information about the candidates, I continue to be impressed by the team Obama has brought together. Passionate, incredibly smart, with a good grasp of both the analytical and the heart and soul of the matter. They are multi-racial, women and men, community and ivy-league trained.

I understand the concerns about their youth, but how much longer will young leaders have to wait to put their future first ideas into action? My father was 26 when he won lawsuits against white segregationists in Mississippi. My mother was twenty-five when she published her first collection of poetry.

So glad to see this. I just wrote a piece about being an eco-mom for the upcoming collection The Maternal Is Political, edited Shari MacDonald Strong. It's an uphill battle and I wish I could sell my SUV and buy a Prius like, this afternoon, but amazingly, Maui doesn't even have public recycling!

I continue to be amazed by the dexterity of the writers and creators of Mad Men. Each episode, including the one I just watched on Itunes about Draper's wife being used as a pawn in her husband's business dealings, is so smart in the way it handles the misogyny and backwardness of pre-feminist white America.

The show deals with the conflict between the beats and the straights, the counter cultural left and the Nixon right, the woman who wants to be judged on the merits of her mind and the women who think going to work is synonymous with looking for a husband. It deconstructs the supposedly assured hyper-butch provider masculinity and shows that beneath it lies a complex, insecure little boy dying to make his mother/wife happy.

It shows that while the "little lady" is going insane with boredom in a Valium induced haze at home, the "big man" is jockeying for position at work, and fielding literal and psychological punches from men more and less powerful than himself.

It's gripping, really. Like a horrible accident. Down to the black men working as elevator "boys," and the Jewesses in the garment business who can get the ad men to take their company accounts but never, ever, anything more. There's the closeted gay man, too, suave and gorgeous, and eternally alone. There's the incessant drinking and smoking standing in for real, human interaction; and those damning issues of class, status, and who can afford what apartment in New York.

I'm writing about Mad Men because all of the coverage I read doesn't seem to get how smart it is. Perhaps because it is too awful to imagine that it represents 1950's white America the way it really was. And maybe because if it can be recreated so deftly, a lot of that so-called lost world must remain.

I don't know if it was being with all those Jews at the SF Jewish Community Center last night, or thinking more about what spiritual tradition my partner and I should pass on to our son, but I found myself wondering about the black jewish thing today.

I came across this very interesting podcast on the largest African-American synagogue in America. It raises important questions about what it means to be Jewish. Most people consider Jewishness to be synonymous with European culture, as most American Jews descended primarily from Eastern Europe, some via what was then called Palestine. But what does it mean to be Jewish for someone from Uganda, or the South side of Chicago?

This is a must listen for anyone interested in the subject.

PS It's cold cold cold in Philadelphia! But I am looking forward to speaking at St. Joe's tomorrow. Hope to see you there!